[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-7969?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15569528#comment-15569528
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on GROOVY-7969:
----------------------------------------
Github user blackdrag commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/448#discussion_r83071079
--- Diff: src/main/org/codehaus/groovy/ast/tools/PropertyNodeUtils.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
+ * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
+ * distributed with this work for additional information
+ * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
+ * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
+ * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
+ * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
+ * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
+ * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
+ * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
+ * specific language governing permissions and limitations
+ * under the License.
+ */
+package org.codehaus.groovy.ast.tools;
+
+import org.codehaus.groovy.ast.PropertyNode;
+
+import java.lang.reflect.Modifier;
+
+public class PropertyNodeUtils {
+ /**
+ * Fields within the AST that have no explicit visibility are deemed
to be properties
+ * and represented by a PropertyNode. The Groovy compiler creates
accessor methods and
+ * a backing field for such property nodes. During this process, all
modifiers
+ * from the property are carried over to the backing field (so a
property marked as
+ * {@code transient} will have a {@code transient} backing field) but
when creating
+ * the accessor methods we don't carry over modifier values which
don't make sense for
+ * methods (this includes VOLATILE and TRANSIENT) but other modifiers
are carried over,
+ * for example {@code static}.
+ *
+ * @param propNode the original property node
+ * @return the modifiers which make sense for an accessor method
+ */
+ public static int adjustPropertyModifiersForMethod(PropertyNode
propNode) {
+ int propNodeModifiers = propNode.getModifiers();
+ // GROOVY-3726: clear volatile, transient modifiers so that they
don't get applied to methods
+ if ((propNodeModifiers & Modifier.VOLATILE) != 0) {
+ propNodeModifiers -= Modifier.VOLATILE;
+ }
+ if ((propNodeModifiers & Modifier.TRANSIENT) != 0) {
+ propNodeModifiers -= Modifier.TRANSIENT;
+ }
--- End diff --
or: propNodeModifiers = ~(Modifier.TRANSIENT | Modifier.VOLATILE) &
propNodeModifiers
> Incorrect modifers on setter for volatile property with @Bindable/@Vetoable
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GROOVY-7969
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-7969
> Project: Groovy
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Paul King
>
> As part of GROOVY-3726 we fixed getter/setter method modifiers for volatile
> (or transient) properties. The @Bindable and @Vetoable transforms however
> generate their own setters and bypass that fix.
> Here is a script to reproduce the problem:
> {code}
> import static java.lang.reflect.Modifier.toString
> import groovy.beans.Bindable
> class Foo {
> volatile Date now
> }
> @Bindable class Bar {
> volatile Date then
> }
> void pretty(int mod) { println "${mod.toString().padRight(10)}" +
> toString(mod) }
> pretty(Foo.getMethod('getNow').modifiers)
> pretty(Foo.getMethod('setNow', Date).modifiers)
> pretty(Bar.getMethod('getThen').modifiers)
> pretty(Bar.getMethod('setThen', Date).modifiers)
> {code}
> which currently produces:
> {noformat}
> 1 public
> 1 public
> 1 public
> 65 public volatile
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
